Welcome to the Globalstar Inc. Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2013 Earnings Conference Call. My name is Sherry and I’ll be your operator for today's call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Later, we will conduct the question-and-answer session. Please note that this conference is being recorded. I’d like to turn the call over to Kathryn Singer. Kathryn, please go ahead.

Thank you, operator. Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for joining us for today’s conference call to discuss Globalstar’s three and 12 month results for the period ended December 31, 2013. Before we begin, please note the following. This call may contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of federal securities laws. Factors that could cause results to differ materially are described in the Safe Harbor section of recent press releases and in Globalstar’s SEC filings, including its Annual Report on Form 10-K and Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q. The press release, this conference call and the associated slide presentation, which is available on the Investor Relations page of Globalstar’s website, include discussions of certain non-GAAP financial measures, as defined under SEC rules. The press release provides a reconciliation of each of those non-GAAP measures to the most comparable GAAP measure. Please note that the information in this call is accurate only as of today, Monday, March 10, 2014. The fourth quarter and full year 2013 press release that was issued this afternoon, which contains certain financial information, is available on the Company website at www.globalstar.com. Later today an audio recording of this conference call will also be available via telephone dial-in and a webcast recording, along with the copy of the slide presentation will also be made available on the Company website. Today’s call is being presented by Mr. Jay Monroe, Chairman and CEO; and Rebecca Clary, Chief Accounting Officer and Corporate Controller. Joining Jay and Rebecca for the question-and-answer session will be Tim Taylor, Vice President of Finance. Now it's my pleasure to turn the call over to Jay.

Good afternoon, everyone and thank you for joining us today. 2013 represented a truly historic year for Globalstar. And after a multiyear period of difficulties and delays this was the year we were able to emerge with a fully operational second-generation constellation, a materially improved balance sheet, additional liquidity, an improved growth profile, and the initiation of an important regulatory proceeding. Looking back at the position we were in just a year ago, I am very proud of the Company’s ability to have skillfully navigated these issues, and it was driven by our resolute belief in the opportunities that remained before us at Globalstar. We are driven mainly by the fundamental belief that the removal of certain impediments which set the Company on a path to long-term prosperity. Our opportunities where at the centre of a global revolution in the communications industry and we look forward to being a major participant in solving the world’s demand for connectivity, whether it’s satellite markets outside terrestrial networks, mobile broadband access outdoors, in-homes, in the workplace and classrooms or by providing critical communications for close disaster recovery operations, globally. No other single company, satellite or terrestrial, has similar global assets with the potential for competitive and market disruptive telecommunications offerings everywhere. Simply put, we have the opportunity to deliver bits and bytes, faster, at the lowest cost while covering billions of people within our global footprint. Globalstar’s unique and expansive potential is what has driven you, our investors, to stick with us during some very dark days. Our employees continually innovated and improved operations in the face of uncertainty and for me personally to develop my firm’s capital and 10 years of my life to help position the Company to capitalize on its inherent that often overlooked opportunities. While we worked hard to be in a position that we are in today, we’re not pausing for a moment even as we celebrate recent successes. In the past year we cleared many obstacles, but our focus remains on the near and long-term growth opportunities to maximize the utilization of our unique asset base including ensuring the success of our ongoing regulatory process. Before I provide additional updates and we open for Q&A, let’s turn to Rebecca to review Q4 and full year 2013 financial results. Rebecca?

Thank you, Jay and good afternoon everyone. Our financial performance in 2013 was marked by significant improvements throughout our business. We were successful in cleaning up our balance sheet, particularly as it relates to the amendment of our COFACE Facility agreement and the exchange of our five and three quarters note. We were also successful in growing our Duplex business by leveraging the completed constellation. With our final satellite being placed into service in August, we were able to capitalize on this milestone in the last few months of the year, and even with only four months of contribution including three months of slow sales from a seasonality perspective our annual 2013 results were strong. Key metrics from our Duplex business experienced material growth on a year-over-year basis from 2012 with service revenues up 24%, equipment revenues up 90%, ARPU up 29% and gross subscriber additions more than doubling. The successes in our SPOT and Simplex lines of business further supplemented Duplex growth. Now focusing on a quarter-over-quarter financial performance. As shown on Slide 3, total revenue was 21 million in the fourth quarter of 2013 compared to 19.1 million in the fourth quarter of 2012. This increase was driven by growth in the service and equipment revenue. Service revenue increased 10% to 16.8 million during the fourth quarter of 2013 due primarily to an expansion in our total subscriber base and improved ARPU and equipment revenue increased 12% to 4.2 million over the same period due primarily to an increase in the volume of units sold. Service revenue from our Duplex, SPOT and Simplex lines of business improved 1.8 million or 15% from the fourth quarter of 2012. SPOT and Simplex service revenue experienced slight increases, while Duplex service revenue contributed 1.5 million to the total increase, representing a…

Thanks, Rebecca. Although all second-generation satellites were in-service for only last four months of 2013, which is a seasonally weak period for us each year. Globalstar experienced a return to robust Duplex growth as new subscribers in the MSS market have once again started to choose us over the competition. We have always had the market’s finest voice quality, leased expense apprising and fastest mobile data rates and last year’s restoration of service reestablishes the Company’s position in these areas. While we think our competitors will retain their leading positions in the deep ocean maritime markets, we expect Globalstar’s share of the industries land mobile and coastal markets to continue to increase. After years of struggling to compete and being forced to slash pricing, while at the same time diversifying our product offering to include mass consumer products, our network has been restored so we can capitalize on the inherent advantages of Globalstar’s network architecture. Last year these technical advantages and improved product offerings drove material growth across our primary Duplex metrics, including as Rebecca said, rapidly growing gross additions up 126%, equipment revenue which increased 90% during that time, ARPU which increased 29% and service revenue which grew 24%. All this drove EBITDA up by 58% quarter-over-quarter. We’re now beyond the inflection point we’ve talked about over the past several quarters and look to emerge as the industry’s leading Duplex operator with the highest growth rate. Duplex is our highest margin business line and we will drive EBITDA and cash flow over the coming years from this. The fixed cost nature of our asset base results in highly EBITDA accretive service revenue, service revenue driven by a combination of increased usage, new subscriber contribution and the continued migration of existing subscribers at a higher rate plans. Let’s turn to…

and:

Thank you. We will now begin the question-and-answer session. (Operator Instructions) Our first question is from Jim McIlree of Chardan Capital.

Thank you and good afternoon. Jay, can you just give us an update on any changes that might be occurring and how you’re viewing the TLPS partnerships or monetization? I know that there is a lot of different scenarios out there, but I’m just wondering if anything has changed in terms of what might be looking better or worse as you discuss this with financial partners? Chardan Capital: Thank you and good afternoon. Jay, can you just give us an update on any changes that might be occurring and how you’re viewing the TLPS partnerships or monetization? I know that there is a lot of different scenarios out there, but I’m just wondering if anything has changed in terms of what might be looking better or worse as you discuss this with financial partners?

Jim, not much has changed except that we have a pulled a couple of additional experimental licenses for our parties who are now testing TLPS, so we’re encouraged both by the actual results of those tests, but also the interest from several different parties. But there has been no substantial change in the nature and timing of the dialog with third-parties at this point. Many of whom are exceedingly interested enough to test, but are watching the regulatory process currently.

And are these experimental licenses in the same geographies that prior to experimental licenses were located? Chardan Capital: And are these experimental licenses in the same geographies that prior to experimental licenses were located?

There is one that’s recently been pulled on the far Eastern side of the United States. I recall that another one was pulled a while ago in Boston, but some on the West Coast and I know some others are working their way through the process now.

Okay. Rebecca you talked about cleansing the base in 2014, I was hoping that I could get a little bit more clarity on what you mean by that. So, if in terms of the Duplex base 86,000-87,000, or so, how much of that needs to be cleansed still? Chardan Capital: Okay. Rebecca you talked about cleansing the base in 2014, I was hoping that I could get a little bit more clarity on what you mean by that. So, if in terms of the Duplex base 86,000-87,000, or so, how much of that needs to be cleansed still?

So I would say about 20% or so, 20% to 30% and I mean when I say cleansing the base is just really working through various subscribers who aren’t generating a significant amount of revenue. The major subscribers that we transitioned to purely usage based plans just to retain the customer relationship and that was several years ago when we were working to rebuild our constellation. And now that we’re back and we’ve got coverage and service levels that are more than commercially acceptable. We’re trying to convert those customers to our current rate plans. And so it’s a process and we’re dealing with that many subscribers in terms of reaching out to them, building awareness, letting them know that we’re back and then getting them on current rate plans. So these are more price sensitive subscribers because they are not heavy users and that’s why you’re kind of seeing like increased churn levels like you did this past quarter. And so as we kind of finish the migration process we might expect to see those same churn levels.

Okay. And what were the gross-adds for Duplex in Q4? Chardan Capital: Okay. And what were the gross-adds for Duplex in Q4?

There were about a 4,500-5,000, 3,500, sorry Jim.

3,500? Chardan Capital: 3,500?

Yes.

Okay, great. And I’m sorry Rebecca but if you could just repeat a couple of things. You said, you were talking about interest expense and it sounds like you mentioned something kind of different and then lastly you talked about the Terrapin commitment and I wrote down 24 million. Can you just confirm that that’s the right number? Chardan Capital: Okay, great. And I’m sorry Rebecca but if you could just repeat a couple of things. You said, you were talking about interest expense and it sounds like you mentioned something kind of different and then lastly you talked about the Terrapin commitment and I wrote down 24 million. Can you just confirm that that’s the right number?

Yes, that is the right number.

Okay, great and then the interest expense? Chardan Capital: Okay, great and then the interest expense?

On the interest side, so we had the remaining 5% notes convert during the quarter in November we referenced it on the last call that -- so those conversions basically that bad debt and the related discount was in-charge to interest expense during the quarter so is a non-cash event that is not going to recur.

Right, and the amount of that non-cash conversion cost was what? Chardan Capital: Right, and the amount of that non-cash conversion cost was what?

For the year I think it was about 16 million no again I have to check that number and then the remaining amount relates to just less interest being capitalized which we’ve seen over the past several quarters and I think that number was about 6 million for the year.

Okay, great. Thanks a lot. Chardan Capital: Okay, great. Thanks a lot.

Sure thing, thanks.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Marco Rodriguez of Stonegate Securities.

Good afternoon and thanks for taking my questions. I was wondering if you could talk a little bit more about the Sat-Fi product, if you can perhaps provide some more color surrounding the launch date, how it’s going to be basically launched through channels and maybe you can talk a little bit about how you might be thinking about any kind of potential cannibalization of other products? Stonegate Securities: Good afternoon and thanks for taking my questions. I was wondering if you could talk a little bit more about the Sat-Fi product, if you can perhaps provide some more color surrounding the launch date, how it’s going to be basically launched through channels and maybe you can talk a little bit about how you might be thinking about any kind of potential cannibalization of other products?

Marco, this is Jay. We intend to sell Sat-Fi through our existing distribution channels, mostly the channel which includes our vertical market channels and to directly to government in certain cases. We don’t expect it to be high a cannibalization product at this point. I guess overtime as the price comes down and we create something which is Hughes-based we expect it to pretty dramatically expand the marketplace for other customers so once again wouldn’t necessarily anticipate a lot of cannibalization. We do expect it in the second quarter we’re on-tap to deliver it then, assuming that we get the approvals from the FCC which is the regulatory certification process that’s ongoing now.

Okay. And is the service somewhat different in regard to the normal Duplex MSS service where you’re not really expecting that much cannibalization? Stonegate Securities: Okay. And is the service somewhat different in regard to the normal Duplex MSS service where you’re not really expecting that much cannibalization?

Marco, the way I think about this is that it will be interesting to see how people utilize it, because they can use their existing device. It seems intuitive that they will use it more. But we really don’t have any experience with that yet, so can’t say. We do expect to sell high ARPU plans associated with the product and time will tell how that is received in the marketplace, but we’re pretty bullish on it right now. We’ve been using it a couple of beta customers have been using it, some government customers have been using it and the voice quality on it is just remarkable and the other services around it are just amazing. And so we anticipate good, good things to come of it, but we don’t have experience with it yet so we don’t have much to base that upon except history when we launch new products.

Got it, okay. And then coming back here to the Duplex results here in Q4, the growth seemed a little bit lower than I was anticipating as well as the ARPU. Did you see any sort of increased competition in the quarter or what was kind of driving those results there? Stonegate Securities: Got it, okay. And then coming back here to the Duplex results here in Q4, the growth seemed a little bit lower than I was anticipating as well as the ARPU. Did you see any sort of increased competition in the quarter or what was kind of driving those results there?

No, Marco, not necessarily increased competition, I’d point more towards seasonality just fourth quarter’s historically low for us.

Okay, great, thanks guys. Stonegate Securities: Okay, great, thanks guys.

Thank you, Marco.

Thank you. And our next questions from Lance Vitanza.

Hi, it’s Lance Vitanza, CRT, thanks for taking the questions. I just wanted to ask you, you mentioned during prepared remarks I believe that you might be issuing some more stock to vendors in lieu of some cash payments. And I’m wondering if you could provide any incremental color there in terms of the sort of the dollar amounts of the CapEx that this would involve and potentially any color on how the stock grants would be priced? CRT Capital Group: Hi, it’s Lance Vitanza, CRT, thanks for taking the questions. I just wanted to ask you, you mentioned during prepared remarks I believe that you might be issuing some more stock to vendors in lieu of some cash payments. And I’m wondering if you could provide any incremental color there in terms of the sort of the dollar amounts of the CapEx that this would involve and potentially any color on how the stock grants would be priced?

Sure, sure. Lance, think about it this way just to put it in a macro perspective, we have probably 25 million of CapEx plus or minus that we’ll do this year and if the vendors all took 25 million that would compare to roughly a fully diluted 2.5 billion of Globalstar market cap, so the implication would be 1% and the price is at a very modest discount to the 10 day or longer weighted average price of Globalstar stock, so it can be thought of as being slightly but just slightly below market.

Thanks very much. CRT Capital Group: Thanks very much.

You’re welcome.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Dowey Dreyer.

Hello all can you hear me?

Yes we can.

Okay, listen question is -- Jay I want you to pass my regards on to being higher [indiscernible], but I want to go -- what is our association with Orbcomm and Inmarsat?

That’s actually one that we’re involved in as well Dewey and what we’ll doing is…

Jay, it’s Uncle Dowey…

Yes Dowey.

If you’re black you call me Dewey, if you’re white you call me Dowey.

Yes Dowey excuse me.

Alright, no problem.

Yes, that is a partnership between us as well as the guys from Inmarsat and Orbcomm, so that different types of connectivity are in new Orbcomm devices and therefore if somebody wants a certain type of service which might be one data speed or whether it’s one-way or two-way, and whether it is store and forward or other than they will activate the service within that Orbcomm modem to provide that service. There are actually four services in many of the Orbcomm products, one of which would be a cellular connectivity. So this is a partnership that we’re all involved in, we’re creating standards around it so that it makes it easy for other people to build back-office solutions and others and broaden the marketplace for it. And it should be pretty interesting over the next couple of years.

Yes okay good. I am also an owner of Orbcomm, but not yet of Inmarsat. Listen you guys are doing a great job I want to thank you very much. I have been a stockholder from -- and I am going to be it -- it’s been a while, but I thank you very much for your time and thank you for coming to work. Okay I will take your leave. I’m retired, next question.

Thank you very much. Bye, bye.

Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Dan Weiss.

Thank you for taking my question and this is Dan Weiss from Credit Suisse. My question is regarding the recent headlines on the 5 gigahertz spectrum. I was hoping that you could clarify what Globalstar’s existing spectrum rights are in 5 gigahertz as well as whether you view any expansion of Wi-Fi in the 5 gigahertz’s band as potential competition for the TLPS network? And then kind of part three to that, is that do you think by kind of working with the FCC to expand or rather loosen the interference standards in 5 gigahertz, that will kind of help your case for TLPS passage moving forward? Credit Suisse: Thank you for taking my question and this is Dan Weiss from Credit Suisse. My question is regarding the recent headlines on the 5 gigahertz spectrum. I was hoping that you could clarify what Globalstar’s existing spectrum rights are in 5 gigahertz as well as whether you view any expansion of Wi-Fi in the 5 gigahertz’s band as potential competition for the TLPS network? And then kind of part three to that, is that do you think by kind of working with the FCC to expand or rather loosen the interference standards in 5 gigahertz, that will kind of help your case for TLPS passage moving forward?

Okay, I can answer those questions. First of all the rights, we have the rights as the licensed interest in the 5 gigahertz channels that we operate in. And the unlicensed spectrum users have to abide by the rules that exist in the FCC. And those rules basically say that unlicensed interest cannot cause harmful interference to the licensed interest. So in that sense, we have the rights and we’re content with those. However, in recognition of what the FCC is trying to accomplish with spectrum policy generally, they came to us through this proceeding and asked that we be flexible and work with them and work the 5 gigahertz unlicensed interests in order to make some of the 5.1 gigahertz spectrum available to them on a largely non-interfering basis. And we worked through a process with them that’s lasted the last six months, but the last two months in the furnace and the folks from NCTA which represent a bunch of the cable interests came up with a good solution from Globalstar’s perspective, I think it’s a good solution from the FCC’s perspective and it’s clearly a good solution from their perspective, which eliminates truly harmful interference to us as we view it. It will interfere with Globalstar a little bit, but we hope that it is not harmful and it’s based upon relatively conservative assumptions of what will be rolled out in that band. Now, there is little question that the 5 gigahertz band operates quite differently than the 2.4 gigahertz band and therefore our TLPS offering and regular Wi-Fi. The nature of it is because of its propagation that it is not a long distance solution, it’s a good high capacity solution close to an access point. And so it will serve a lot of purposes, I mean if you think about it from an indoor perspective it will be very helpful and the 802.11 AC standard is designed in order to enhance capacity in close ranges to access points. So I don’t view it as competitive so much as an augment to what happens in the 2.4 and regular Wi-Fi channels. Does our help in resolving the 5.1 competitive situation help us with the FCC in 2.4? Yes, I think so. I mean clearly we were trying to work with a group to create something that protected Globalstar, but we did it with the FCC helping us and we did it with them helping us. And trying to be a reasonable soldier can only honor to our benefit long-term.

Certainly. And where exactly are your spectrum rights within 5 gigahertz can clarify that? Credit Suisse: Certainly. And where exactly are your spectrum rights within 5 gigahertz can clarify that?

Sure, 51-50 to 52-50.

And that’s just for the geography surrounding your actual ground based satellites correct or I used the wrong term but? Credit Suisse: And that’s just for the geography surrounding your actual ground based satellites correct or I used the wrong term but?

The gateways?

Correct. Sorry. Credit Suisse: Correct. Sorry.

Actually, it’s not. The nature of the interference is something that is felt by the satellites. The impact is felt on the feeder links, but it originates from the satellites. And without getting too technical, all I can say is that wherever there are access points if they hadn’t come with the standards that the FCC and NCTA worked out and they were just looking up the sky and impacting the satellite, it has the effect of diminishing the capacity. The actual impact though is not based upon close proximity to the visible gateways on the ground.

Understood that 51-50 to 52-50 though that’s not the equivalent of your globally harmonized spectrum rights for example in S&L band. This I meant are the spectrum rights more geographically constrained? Credit Suisse: Understood that 51-50 to 52-50 though that’s not the equivalent of your globally harmonized spectrum rights for example in S&L band. This I meant are the spectrum rights more geographically constrained?

No, it is identical in that sense. We have the rights to that spectrum wherever we operate globally as part of the architecture and the original licenses with the ITL.

Thank you and one last follow-up question on related well to 5 gigahertz, have you received any comments thus far for TLPS, the NPRM? Credit Suisse: Thank you and one last follow-up question on related well to 5 gigahertz, have you received any comments thus far for TLPS, the NPRM?

No, we haven’t. But that’s not unusual generally speaking the way these processes operate is no one files before the last day. And the obvious reason is that nobody wants anyone else to see what their position will be. And therefore can respond in fact a second time. So no one really responds until the 75th day.

Okay, thank you very much. Credit Suisse: Okay, thank you very much.

Okay.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Gary Jacoby.

Good afternoon and thanks for staying so late and taking questions. A couple of questions about this year, 2014, if you haven’t talked too much about your expectations would you spend a minute in terms of market share and any financial discussion you are willing to have about 2014?

Sure. First in terms of just pure guidance Gary that is something that we do not offer, so sorry about that but that’s just the way that we have operated. And in terms of market share, I think when you stand back and look what -- at Globalstar’s results from 2013 and with only a constellation completed for less than all of the year in 2013 you’ve already seen a manifest pickup in our subscriber editions. Other sub-editions for the other companies are relatively flat. Ours have been growing nicely. And I think it’s really indicative of two factors; number one, the voice quality, and if you haven’t used Globalstar before, I encourage you to try sometime, it is really remarkable, it is as good as landline quality and that differentiates us. And the other is that we’ve been very cautious in how we priced things and tried to make sure that our equipment prices are extremely competitive relative to our peers. And so we’ve been picking up subs rather dramatically and our competitors have really not been. We expect that to continue. How that translates into market share, I’d have to think about and work through some math on. But certainly, it will be a positive impact on market share. However, long-term our objective is clear which is to make a bigger market rather than to be in a position where all we’re doing is taking share from others.

Okay. Do you anticipate as the year goes on that you’ll give a little color into what your expectations are as we move forward?

It’s doubtful.

Okay, thank you very much again, have a nice evening.

Thank you, Gary.

Thank you. And our final question comes from Steve Sweeney.

Hi. Thanks for taking my question. I had a follow-up on the 5 gigahertz FFC filing. I know you’ve answered the question. Does the agreement sort of give you some goodwill with the FCC on your TLPS NPRM? I was thinking along the lines of -- you came up this agreement with the cable industry and the NCTA, does it sort of make some strategic partnerships with maybe some cable companies or something along those lines more probable or do you sort of paved the way for something like that?

Well, I think we’ve been pretty upfront in the past about the work that we’re doing with various groups of partners meaning industry segments and cable is clearly one of those. There is a lot of reason why what we do at the TLPS level should be and in fact is interesting to the cable interests and though these two processes are not strictly linked, either in the cable companies minds or in our ours, again I think we worked well with them, this was a great solution, they came up with it. Not that we didn’t prod, but they came up with it themselves and we’re pleased that they did, so I think all in all augers well for us long term.

I mean when I first saw the dispute, I guess I don’t know, a few, a month ago or so it seemed like it was going to be a longer process and I guess I was a little surprised at how quickly it was resolved. That was the -- I guess it was the reason for the question, but I had one follow-up on the migration of the Duplex base from the non-paying subscribers. When you say you are successful in getting them to upgrade to the rate plans, can they use their old handsets and equipment, I mean it seems like if the constellation went down or was degraded several years ago, they’d probably need a handset upgrade, I just wanted to see how that works, do they need new handsets or can they use their old stuff?

No, they should be able to use their old stuff and to the extent that they need a battery then we would of course supply that but they’re going to use their old handsets with no problem.

Okay. And then one last question on the Sat-Fi service, in the experimental or the trial runs what kind of bandwidth, what’s a realistic bandwidth rate you can get on the data part of it?

Right now Sat-Fi operates just exactly like the regular Globalstar network over the Qualcomm chipsets, so it’s 9.6 speeds plus compression which is 4 times that of Iridium and Inmarsat handset doesn’t actually accommodate data, so it’s still very nice option for people that know how to utilize it and we provide a layer of software that makes that easy for them.

Okay, great, thanks a lot for taking the questions and have a good night.

You’re welcome. Okay operator, I think that was the last question. So thank you all for your participation today, we’ll keep you informed of the ongoing operational progress. I mean our regulatory milestones as those all occur, as I mentioned earlier we’re not pausing for a moment and continue to work every day to ensure the Company fully capitalizes on the opportunities in front of us this year. Thanks again and have a good evening.

Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. This concludes today’s conference. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.